Will you buy a GM if the government owns 50%+?

Cole · Apr 30, 2009

John Galbreath Jr. said:
Paging Cole ;D

Im not getting in on this.

John Galbreath Jr. · Apr 30, 2009

Cole said:
Im not getting in on this.

Man, you can't let that go, he all but called you a queer.

Cole · Apr 30, 2009

John Galbreath Jr. said:
Man, you can't let that go, he all but called you a queer.

lol, doesn't bother me,

draggbody · Apr 30, 2009

John Galbreath Jr. said:
Man, you can't let that go, he all but called you a queer.

he did want pink seat belts in his buggy....

Cole · Apr 30, 2009

draggbody said:
he did want pink seat belts in his buggy....

Yep and it has them to.

blacksheep10 · Apr 30, 2009

Cole said:
Im not getting in on this.

probably good.
Its hard to argue with common sense

Budget YJ · Apr 30, 2009

patooyee said:
I got into a huge debate over on the OFN about the unions with a guy who was pretty extreme in his belief that the problem with the unions and the car companies wasn't the oraganizations, business practices, or expenses but instead the execs at the top skimming off the top. He seemed to believe that 90% of GM's and the AUW's profits went directly to the top 1% of the execs. (He even claimed that cost of raw materials played no part in the final pricing of a vehicle whatsoever. He was an old mid-level car-plant mgr. for a long time so I'm sure he was close enough to the fraud to see it but not benefit from it which is probably why he was so spiteful toward the execs.) I'm sure he was probably greatly exaggerating in his overstatement of the probelem but nonetheless had some validity about the fraud that probably takes place at that level where there is no supervision to deter theft. I've also heard tons of horror stories about the unions and the stupid crap that they make the companies spend money on. (Paying guys not to work, broad definitions of dibilitating injuries, etc.) However, if you talk to a union worker many of them swear that they couldn't survive without the union. Personally, I find it hard to believe that, in this day and age, any big company like that could take advantage of their workers like they did before the unions were there. I think that the press would have a field day with GM if they tried some **** that the union suppossedly protects workers against now. I almost think that the unions have been so effective in what they were built to do that they regulated themselves into obsolescence. That being said though, even if somehow they did get rid of UAW something else would surely rise up in its place. If nothing else, the workers would unite just to have a bargaining chip against the company.

J. J.

I don't really like this subject either but also don't like how its always blamed on the unions. :wtflol:

My dad raised us on a union salary from ford and now I make my living from a union also(AT&T). I have access to expense reports from both companies. When you have execs with one bonus that is more than mine or my dads "union" salary for a year then you can tell the union is not the problem. The prob is the skimming off the top. I'm sure that working for the union, I'm not the highest paid on here. They are plenty of people on here that make way more money than me. :****: B/C I cant afford a $40,000 or more rig and still be able to pay my house payment and eat :eat:

I don't have a problem with anyone that makes more $than me( I just wish they would let me in on the secret) ;D
Sorry for all that don't agree but I'm union proud and wouldn't have what Ive got without one.

As for the question that started this all......No I wouldn't want to buy from a company owned by the Gov.
The Gov. is to run the country...not own it.
That is just my .02 cents :dblthumb:

Now lets

bigsilly · May 1, 2009

Budget YJ said:
Sorry for all that don't agree but I'm union proud and wouldn't have what Ive got without one.

Sure you would, I am not in a union and I do pretty well in the insurance business. My dad has worked in the oil fields his entire working life and there is no union. He has no college degree and did not graduate from high school, he did get his GED when I was a small child. He makes well into six figures and will retire at or right before his 60th birthday with about a million or so in his retirement plan :****: All this without a union.

Beyer · May 1, 2009

bigsilly said:
Sure you would, I am not in a union and I do pretty well in the insurance business. My dad has worked in the oil fields his entire working life and there is no union. He has no college degree and did not graduate from high school, he did get his GED when I was a small child. He makes well into six figures and will retire at or right before his 60th birthday with about a million or so in his retirement plan :****: All this without a union.

x2.
If you are willing to work hard, yu do not NEED the union. They do help in some cases to keep wages high, but I think they also bring alot of companies to their knees.
I work in the aircraft industry, and there are unions everywhere, which helps keep wages high. My company is non-union, but tries to compete with the wages. Only difference is, my company will fire your ass for being lazy, where a union will protect the lazy and bring the whole company down. A good example is American Airlines. I go out there and everyone is sitting around watching movies or playing dominoes because they have already 'met their quota' for the day and are not allowed (by the union) to do any more work. :wtflol:

I have buddies that work there and take 4 hour lunches because they are bored. :****:

Budget YJ · May 1, 2009

have already 'met their quota' for the day and are not allowed (by the union) to do any more work. :wtflol:

I have buddies that work there and take 4 hour lunches because they are bored. :****:

Thats not union,thats just poor management. :****: and employees taking advantage of it.

Cubby · May 1, 2009

Unions are just organized extortion. The guy pushing the broom at the coke plant isn't worth $14 and hour. I can find lots of people with the ability to push a broom or run an impact on an assembly line, but it's hard to find a person to manage a business and make good, sound decisions. If someone really thinks the UAW forklift driver is worth $50/hr they are out of touch with reality. I don't think any less of these people that have those 50-75/hr union jobs(I'm jealous actually) but I do not, can not, and will not believe that their pay is justified or reasonable based on the requirements of the job.

I also don't think that the CEOs of these corporations can justify their salaries/bonuses. However, they are employed by the dumb ass stock holders that continue to invest in their companies.

Who is the biggest problem? Who knows. I'm not a socialist and unions remind me a lot of socialism. Everything in life is not fair and equal. Some guys get great jobs and get rich easy while other guys work their asses off to scrape by. If you believe that the gov't or some organization should step in to equalize the disparity, I think you are crazy. I have a lot more faith in myself to change my place in life than I do some union or gov't regulation.

I hear what you are saying about being raised on a union salary and making a living on a union salary, but I think you should consider yourself very fortunate. These companies are having a hard time competing in the world and if you don't believe those union salaries and pensions have something to do with it then what is the problem?

blacksheep10 · May 3, 2009

Cubby said:
If someone really thinks the UAW forklift driver is worth $50/hr they are out of touch with reality.
no ****. This is one of the biggest problems I have. Being anti union is kind of dumb, like being anti anything because each union is different. UAW has problems.
I also don't think that the CEOs of these corporations can justify their salaries/bonuses. However, they are employed by the dumb ass stock holders that continue to invest in their companies.
they are the other half of the equation. Both are at fault and the worker being the enemy of the company mentality is propogated by the unions, the man is holding me down so i'm going to **** them at every corner. its broken. I take pride in my work and love my company. I've been in a non union shop where the owner/operator was the man out to **** the worker out of his 40. I left. pretty hard

Who is the biggest problem?
both.....the thought that companies and workers are enemies no assets to each other

Everything in life is not fair and equal. Some guys get great jobs and get rich easy while other guys work their asses off to scrape by. If you believe that the gov't or some organization should step in to equalize the disparity, I think you are crazy communist is the word Karl said let those who can give give so those who don't have can have. **** that. I work had for what I have. I have a lot more faith in myself to change my place in life than I do some union or gov't regulation. high locus of control. its what makes this place run. I put in, I get my ends.

I hear what you are saying about being raised on a union salary and making a living on a union salary, but I think you should consider yourself very fortunate. These companies are having a hard time competing in the world and if you don't believe those union salaries and pensions have something to do with it then what is the problem?
Union salaries and Corporate asshole salaries where they sit in a board room and give each other $100K for showing up today. Both are guilty, probably equally. whats it take though? a revolution?

Budget YJ · May 4, 2009

I guess now we will have to add Chrysler to this also now!!!

Cubby · May 4, 2009

I haven't heard the news for the past few days. Is Chrysler bankrupting or going to be partially owned by the gov or what?

P · May 4, 2009

By gawd if Lee Iacocca still worked for em... laughing1

patooyee · May 4, 2009

Cubby said:
I haven't heard the news for the past few days. Is Chrysler bankrupting or going to be partially owned by the gov or what?

Last I heard the the UAW would get 55% ownership in Chrysler, Fiat 25%, and the gov't the rest. A board of 12 trustees would be appointed to oversee the company at that point. Fiat would appoint a few, UAW would appoint some, and the gov't would appoint the others. Then the government would set benchmarks for Chrysler to achieve. Each benchmark would result in Fiat obtaining percentage of the government's portion of ownership, eventually bcoming eligable to obtain the entire government share and thereby making their potential ownership 45%. A "for instance" of one of the benchmarks would be, "Once you sell a production vehicle that gets over 40mpg you get 5% ownership."

This could change daily though as it is still in federal bankruptcy court right now. Chrsyler's operating expenses as of right now are being paid via fed. government loans though, so it is now official that the government owns Chrysler. GM's deadline for negotiations with their creditors still has a little less than a month left so we won't know what they are going to do until toward the end of May.

What is interesting to me though is that Fiat is not a union company. I wonder why the hell Fiat would even be interested in becoming minority owner in a majority-union-owned company? Seems like a bunch of headaches for very little potential profit. That could just be me though. It does open the doors for Fiat to sell vehicle in America though ....

crturboguy · May 7, 2009

You want to talk fugged up? From this article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090507/bs_nm/us_gm_5

They've lost $88 billion since 2005. That's ~4.5 years or ~1642 days. That means they've lost ~$53.5 MILLION A DAY since 2005? WTF? Shut the company down for a week & I'll take a 1/4 of what it'd save in losses.

--JOsh